Quote from: SeanchaiThe collective's standards.

Seanchai

 The Collective's standards ??  What the hell?

 There is no fricking  "collective" . There is  maybe a buying public - and what majority of them might be interested in buying.

 The average gamer has not even heard of the "GNS" theory stuff. To them  that  is stuff people who spend too much time on the internet talk about.

Which also means that - YES, Gygax does have some wisdom in the original version of D&D that might be worth reading or listening to .


- E.W.C.





 You know what ? Substitute the word "shit"  in the places that I typed "stuff" - I'm still not used to the freedom to cuss freely on a forum.

Quote from: KoltarThere is no fricking  "collective" . There is  maybe a buying public - and what majority of them might be interested in buying.

What do you think the collective that I'm referring to is but the majority of the buying public? The question was, whose standards? My answer was, everyone as a whole.

Quote from: KoltarThe average gamer has not even heard of the "GNS" theory stuff.

And the average gamer isn't playing AD&D. What's your point?

I think maybe you misunderstand. I'm not suggesting Forge models or ideals is the current standard. My idea of what where the current standards lay isn't tied to a particular group or philosophy. The Forge or Forge games have nothing to do with my thought AD&D isn't to the taste of the collective.

Quote from: KoltarWhich also means that - YES, Gygax does have some wisdom in the original version of D&D that might be worth reading or listening to.

Because people haven't heard of GNS, Gygax must have said some things that are wise? Huh?

Seanchai

Quote from: MelanI disagree that "advances in the art of roleplaying" have rendered AD&D outdated - I don't agree with the view that RPGs have "advanced".
 
Which makes me agree with J. Arcane, I guess.

Totally agree. I don't think we are talking scrub boards and washing machines here so much as velcro and buttons. One is newer, but most of us keep our pants up with the other one.

I would say that maybe player tastes have changed more than the games have "advanced", but D&D is still the top dog in the RPG world, ain't it? Gary's advice is still relevant because his game is still relevant. Further, I would argue that the changes that have been made to his game have diminished it rather than improved it. Ultimately it's all in the eye of the beholder, maybe even in the eye of the eye of the deep...

Quote from: SgtSpaceWizard...but D&D is still the top dog in the RPG world, ain't it?...

D&D, but AD&D?

There is a lot of difference between 3e and AD&D. I've seen people make a really good case that 3e shares much more in common with the separate line of D&D Basic/Expert etc. than with AD&D.

As for Gary's thoughts from years and years back there are a lot of people that are relative Nameless Joes who I'd say have better insight. If only for the benefit of years of having seen things play out.

P.S.  You realise that GG loaths to play 3e/3.5, the "top dog", right? It just isn't his bag. In a lot of ways AD&D is really at odds with a lot of what GG has had to say over the years.

Quote from: blakkieD&D, but AD&D?

There is a lot of difference between 3e and AD&D. I've seen people make a really good case that 3e shares much more in common with the separate line of D&D Basic/Expert etc. than with AD&D.

As for Gary's thoughts from years and years back there are a lot of people that are relative Nameless Joes who I'd say have better insight. If only for the benefit of years of having seen things play out.

P.S.  You realise that GG loaths to play 3e/3.5, the "top dog", right? It just isn't his bag. In a lot of ways AD&D is really at odds with a lot of what GG has had to say over the years.

I would argue that D&D 3e resembles AD&D more than basic/expert, but my main point was that overall, it isn't a brand new design, and yet it is still the most played RPG. This is part of why I don't think theres such a thing as an improved state of the art in game design, at least in pure mechanical terms.

I agree with your statement about nameless Joes and the benefit of years of play. I wouldn't say Gary is the last word on gaming, but he wasn't as bad as people make him out to be. I've been on the other side of this fence in my day, but I have to say that rereading those rules as an adult is a different experience than it was when I was 12. Now I feel like I "get it" in a way that evaded me back in the day. Not that I didnt have a blast playing back then, mind you.

Yeah I know Gary don't dig the new stuff, and It's not my thing either. When I run AD&D these days its with 1st ed, pre-unearthed arcana and survival guides. Chalk it up to an aversion to double weapons and feats. That and I'm cheap. Nevertheless, it seems to be doing well without my patronage, and its not because it's a cutting edge reinvention of the RPG as we know it.

Quote from: SeanchaiBut scrub boards still work. People buy washing machines, however. Hand drills still work. Slide rules still work. Fountain pens still work. There's a host of things that still work but aren't used anymore because people's preferences have changed. Just pointing out that AD&D can still be played doesn't change the course of the debate...

Seanchai

Oh, so your position is Lev's after all? Thanks for clearing this up.

Quote from: Pierce InverarityOh, so your position is Lev's after all? Thanks for clearing this up.

So your contribution isn't to address the point, but to attack me? Fine.

Seanchai

Quote from: SeanchaiYeah, because "seems to be" is meaningless.


Sure. They just don't form the majority.

There are more people playing the top 5 "new" games than are playing AD&D, OSRIC, etc.? There are a majority of RPGers that feel AD&D is not "today's" tastes? You're source would be...?

Quote from: SeanchaiAre you saying this because it's elitist or because you think you can score points by playing the elitism card? Because, somehow, I don't think you'd be crying, "Elitist!" if I said, "Consumer tastes have changed and so people purchase washing machines instead of scrub boards to do their laundry."

The underlying assumption being that AD&D is a washboard - which it is not.  Nor is it the new-fangled large capacity washing machine with computer controlled water temperature.  Someone else made the velcro/buttons analogy which is closer to the point.

I'm claiming "elitism" because there are people in this thread who are saying they understand the buying public so well as to claim they evolved beyond AD&D.  That's either arrogant or ignorant - at least until some data sources are provided.

Quote from: SeanchaiThe collective's standards.

Ummm..yeah...the collective. Your statistics and information on what "the collective" thinks is from what source again?

And lest I'm misconstrued, it's fine to have this opinion.  It's not fine to pass it off as some sort of objective fact.

Quote from: SgtSpaceWizardI would argue that D&D 3e resembles AD&D more than basic/expert, but my main point was that overall, it isn't a brand new design, and yet it is still the most played RPG.

It isn't a brand new design, but there's plenty that's changed or is new. For example, armor, thieves skills, psionics, monsters having a standard set of attributes and skills, bonus classification, magic item classification, etc..

Of course, AD&D and AD&D 2e were still the most popular RPG of their day.

Seanchai

Quote from: SgtSpaceWizardI would argue that D&D 3e resembles AD&D more than basic/expert....

Well you can take that up with others (try Searching, I think Setti was the one talking about it). But I will say that....

Quote...but my main point was that overall, it isn't a brand new design, and yet it is still the most played RPG. This is part of why I don't think theres such a thing as an improved state of the art in game design, at least in pure mechanical terms.

It is a hugely ripped apart and revamped, retooled, and redone set of rules. It kept a some iconic flavour (1st level MM, 3rd level FB/LB, using a d20, 6 stats, the PHB/DMG/MM trilogy of books, most of the basic roles of the races), inspite of some of these not fitting that well anymore. But largely it was a ground up rewrite. Oh sure some pieces of the mechanics made it through very close to intact, like grappling...which remains a clusterhump.

How about Skills? 2e's are only vaguely comparible. Feats, going just a wee bit further than AD&D Weapon Specialization and a few of the class abilities rolled together, don't you think? You don't like them? *shrug* However they allow a flexibility and lot of things to be reflected in the mechanics that just didn't happen with the AD&D rules.

Then there is the writing. Simply far more coherent without a loads and loads of crap that nearly everyone thows out. Polearm vs. polearm chart anyone? The polish is top notch.

Washboard and washing machine? Well I'll say one of those old washing machines my grandma used when I was a kid with the swirling tub and the wringer (that'd eat your fingers if you weren't careful) and it needed a rinse tub on the other side and then you flipped the runoff tray underneath the wringer and ran the clothes back through again to get the rinse water out and then put it in a little standup spinner to get some more water out before taking them out to hang them on the line.  Compared to the AEG high effiency frontloader we've got now that'll do 'er all in one pass and has 3 settings of spinout at the end that results in quite dry clothes.  Sure the physical process remains roughly the same (except the wringer/spinner part is all replaced with centrifical force for all 3 stages) but it is one hell of a difference in practice from the POV of the person washing clothes.

QuoteI wouldn't say Gary is the last word on gaming, but he wasn't as bad as people make him out to be.

Sadly a good deal of what he has to say certainly is...and then there is trying to figure out WTF he was saying. There are some things though that he had figured out and I don't mean to totally belittle him (and his comrades of the time). Of course it is very hard to tell when he's being serious and he'll grossly overstate or say outlandish things just 'cause. It's the kind of guy he is.  EDIT: For better and for worse.

P.S. I first read 1e when I was an adult. Or at least of voting age.

Quote from: James J SkachThere are more people playing the top 5 "new" games than are playing AD&D, OSRIC, etc.? There are a majority of RPGers that feel AD&D is not "today's" tastes? You're source would be...?

Sales data.

I'm assuming you disagree. What's your source, should you decide to claim that the folks playing AD&D, OSRIC, etc., are anything other than a minority?

Quote from: James J SkachI'm claiming "elitism" because there are people in this thread who are saying they understand the buying public so well as to claim they evolved beyond AD&D. That's either arrogant or ignorant - at least until some data sources are provided.

It might be arrogant or ignorant, but it's not elitist.

Quote from: James J SkachAnd lest I'm misconstrued, it's fine to have this opinion.  It's not fine to pass it off as some sort of objective fact.

And your countering arguments contain...what then? I mean, unless you're willing to commit to saying your assertions are facts, you've really got nothing solid on which to base your case, right?

Seanchai

Quote from: SeanchaiSales data.

I'm assuming you disagree. What's your source, should you decide to claim that the folks playing AD&D, OSRIC, etc., are anything other than a minority?

I'm asking for you to point me to the sales data that includes the free downloads of OSRIC, or the secondhand purchases of AD&D.

Quote from: SeanchaiIt might be arrogant or ignorant, but it's not elitist.

Really?  It seems to fit the second definition fine - at the very least be in  proximity.  If you can't see that, I will agree to disagree in an effort not to get side tracked in a definition war.

Quote from: SeanchaiAnd your countering arguments contain...what then? I mean, unless you're willing to commit to saying your assertions are facts, you've really got nothing solid on which to base your case, right?

I've never passed them off as other than opinion - actually more simply questioning the argument provided being fact. I'm perfectly comfortable saying that it's my opinion.  I've asked for data that somehow undergirds the manner in which someone knows the tastes and feelings of "today's RPG consumer" other than as anecdotes.

I'd go so far as to say that it's not even my opinion.  I'd say I haven't formed an opinion as the lack of evidence (I'd be doubtful you could get the kind of data necessary to enforce one viewpoint or the other) doesn't allow me to base it on any facts. It certainly doesn't allow for the level of certainty and veil of objectivism that gets tossed around. That's all I'm saying.

As one who actually nteracts with the "Buying Public" on a daily basis , I can tell you that the majority of gamers are still playing Dungeons & Dragons or some version of it. If they are involved in two or more gaming groups  - one of them is playing some version of D&D.

 I don't happen to be one of them, I play GURPS  (as a lot of you have figured out by now) However  I can't deny the numbers I see at my store ...and at our nearest competing game store.

 The majority of gamers have never heard of "Dogs In the Vineyard" . If I mentioned that title  they'd probably say "Nope, never heard of it ... is it D20 ? Or like D&D?"  Some might ask : "Is it like World of Darkness?"

 Thats the reality. Dungeons & Dragons (Any version) is the top seller and the game that most people know.  Vampire /World of Darkness is a close second place.
GURPS, HERO system,  Palladium/RIFTS, and Warhammer FRP battle it out on a rotating basis for 3rd and 4th places.

 Look at ther list I posted in the other thread for top selling games.  Its mostly accurate.

 To get back to original point or topic.... so Gygax strayed from what he originally wrote in the initial D&D books.
 So what.
 Big Deal.
 A creator or writer straying along the way after their first really good idea happens all the fucking time. That doesn't lessen the validity of what he said.

 I have no stake in defending Gygax -  I don't even own the original  D&D books.

- E.W.C.

Quote from: KoltarAs one who actually nteracts with the "Buying Public" on a daily basis , I can tell you that the majority of gamers are still playing Dungeons & Dragons or some version of it. If they are involved in two or more gaming groups  - one of them is playing some version of D&D.

 I don't happen to be one of them, I play GURPS  (as a lot of you have figured out by now) However  I can't deny the numbers I see at my store ...and at our nearest competing game store.

 The majority of gamers have never heard of "Dogs In the Vineyard" . If I mentioned that title  they'd probably say "Nope, never heard of it ... is it D20 ? Or like D&D?"  Some might ask : "Is it like World of Darkness?"

 Thats the reality. Dungeons & Dragons (Any version) is the top seller and the game that most people know.  Vampire /World of Darkness is a close second place.
GURPS, HERO system,  Palladium/RIFTS, and Warhammer FRP battle it out on a rotating basis for 3rd and 4th places.

 Look at ther list I posted in the other thread for top selling games.  Its mostly accurate.

 To get back to original point or topic.... so Gygax strayed from what he originally wrote in the initial D&D books.
 So what.
 Big Deal.
 A creator or writer straying along the way after their first really good idea happens all the fucking time. That doesn't lessen the validity of what he said.

 I have no stake in defending Gygax -  I don't even own the original  D&D books.

- E.W.C.

To defend the other side - we're specifically talking about AD&D (at least I thought we were).  Having played every version (Basic, AD&D, 2nd ed, 3.X) I can tell you that the last is as different from AD&D as it is alike.

I'm trying to point out that there were quite a few people who still played AD&D or OSRIC if you go by anecdotal evidence.  I remember when 3.X came out that a bunch of people said "forget it, we'll keep playing AD&D" and I know there was quite a bit of interest on OSRIC.

Does that translate into any sort of claim with validity beyond my memory?  Nope. But it does make me question "collective opinion of today's RPG consumer" as it seems not to take into account this segment of the community; or at the very least dminish it's existence.

Quote from: blakkieIt is a hugely ripped apart and revamped, retooled, and redone set of rules. It kept a some iconic flavour (1st level MM, 3rd level FB/LB, using a d20, 6 stats, the PHB/DMG/MM trilogy of books, most of the basic roles of the races), inspite of some of these not fitting that well anymore. But largely it was a ground up rewrite. Oh sure some pieces of the mechanics made it through very close to intact, like grappling...which remains a clusterhump.

Well, there are some changes that might even be better (like the way they do THAC) but it still seems to me like all the major stuff is there from previous editions (like grappling, alas). Enough so that I don't really see much difference except when we get into stuff like...

Quote from: blakkieHow about Skills? 2e's are only vaguely comparible. Feats, going just a wee bit further than AD&D Weapon Specialization and a few of the class abilities rolled together, don't you think? You don't like them? *shrug* However they allow a flexibility and lot of things to be reflected in the mechanics that just didn't happen with the AD&D rules.

I'm of the opinion these days that secondary skills are preferable to proficiencies. I also don't think the abstract nature of AD&D combat is better served with lots of specific types of combat options and manuevers. I would say that combat is LESS flexible with these things. Before all these tactics were outlined with rules, one had to roleplay it out. Similarly, if I'm a cobbler, why should I have to roll to make shoes? Once upon a time I wanted rules for everything too. Of course that leads to...

Quote from: blakkiePolearm vs. polearm chart anyone?

Not a fan of that or the weapons vs armor type stuff. I think here is where we can see a definite split in consumer tastes, though. The added crunch and funky rules of the older editions of the game seemed to support a more medieval/dark ages style of play, where modern crunch seems to be geared to a more cinematic playstyle and perhaps, ironically, a wargamier type of game. Nevertheless, the original game is still in there. The basic play of the game is fundamentally the same even if chargen is more involved and combat has different bells and whistles.

Gary's writing is probably a matter of taste (and I'm talkin' rules here, not "Gord the Rogue"), but I think I could tell when he was winking at us even as a kid. At least, I knew that I wasn't in an adversarial relationship with the players even when he told us to "kill the bastards". He does say in the forward to the DMG to throw out the rules you dont like and play it your way, even if he has said contradictory things since. That's still the best gaming advice around. I think he was right more often than he was wrong. Frankly, I wish games today had more mad genius' like Gary writing colorful rules than illiterate fluff propping up mediocre settings.